Re: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

Sun, 28 Sep 2003 20:59:43 -0700

Ah, I see...and yeah, now that you put it that way...does make sense. And your right, from what I saw on the news tonight it's just that.....
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 8:53 PM
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

Because the law exempted certain charities and political groups.  Thereby dictating through legislation what is acceptable and what is not.  That will probably be the sticking point.  What would have been less likely to cause a constitutional problem is to have banned it for all.  But by exempting certain groups they opened themselves up for the challenge.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Hopper
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 9:53 PM
To: The Sandbox Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

You lost me on the last  line, while I agree with what you said...how is it the goverment deciding when the 41.7 million are the one's who said don't call? 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Charles

Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 5:52 PM

Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

Never mind…I was…you just said the same thing he did ;)  Seriously though, the answer is difficult, because I hate telemarketers as much as the next person.  I think the do not call list does balance the freedom of the telemarketers to make their calls with the freedom of the consumer to say no.

 

Also it’s not strictly a free speech issue though, because the 1st amendment is referring to political speech so it will be an interesting case.

 

The problem is when the gvt starts deciding what is acceptable speech and what is not, everyone’s liberty is in danger.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 6:44 PM
To: 'The Sandbox Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

When I replied to that earlier, I thought I was replying to David.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jen --
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 9:34 PM
To: The Sandbox Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

How is not letting someone call  on their private line a violation of free speech ?

----- Original Message -----

From: Charles

Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 3:10 PM

Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

Yeah, and immediately after the court ruled it unconstitutional on a free speech basis.  While I hate to say it, the court may have a point.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 6:10 PM
To: 'The Sandbox Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

Cool.

 

David L.

Ben Franklin:  “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt, they have more need of masters.”

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 5:03 PM
To: 'The Sandbox Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

Actually, congress did pass a bill on it yesterday, with only about 5 or 6 no votes.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 5:40 PM
To: 'The Sandbox Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

Ah, well, then congress should get the picture that a lot of people want it or they should boot out the congressmen that will not do a thing about it.

 

David L.

Ben Franklin:  “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt, they have more need of masters.”

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:23 PM
To: 'The Sandbox Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

51 million, but that is really beside the point.  While I think the do not call list is a fairly good idea, the rule went outside the bounds of authority that the FTC holds.  Congress should pass legislation about the issue, and it would probably withstand a court challenge.  These gvt agencies, like FTC, FCC, et al are not constitutionally able to do more than advise congress. 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Hopper
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:16 PM
To: The Sandbox Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

Sure just foret the 41.7 million folks who voluntarily signed up for it....doesn't seem to matter what we the people want when it comes to the courts anymore does it?

 

Heck the reason the do not call list was started in the first place, is because folks screamed for years about getting the unwanted calls. Geez, makes you wonder about some of our judges.....

----- Original Message -----

From: Jen --

Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 3:41 PM

Subject: [Sndbox] Court Rules Against Do Not Call List

 

CBS/AP) A federal judge has ruled that the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority in creating a national do-not-call list against telemarketers.

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by telemarketers who challenged the list, comprised of names of people who do not want to receive business solicitation calls. The immediate impact of Tuesday's ruling was not clear.

The list was to go into effect Oct. 1. Some 41.7 million people have signed up.

U.S. District Judge Lee R. West sided in favor of the plaintiffs, U.S. Security, Chartered Benefit Services Inc., Global Contact Services Inc., InfoCision Management Corp. and Direct Marketing Association Inc.

The judge found that Congress had never given the FTC specific authority to create such a list or enforce penalties against violators.

Under a 1991 law, the FTC was allowed to create a list of people who did not wish to receive telephone solicitations. A separate 1994 law called on the FTC to prohibit abusive or deceptive telephone solicitations. The judge essentially ruled that the authority in the second law does not apply to the list in the first one.

The telemarketing industry estimates that the do-not-call list could cut its business in half, costing it up to $50 billion in sales each year.

More than a dozen states with do-not-call lists plan to add their lists to the national registry this summer, the FTC said.

Telemarketers would have to check the list every three months to see who doesn't want to be called. Those who call listed people could be fined up to $11,000 for each violation.

Consumers had until the end of August to add their phone numbers to the list.

K. Dane Snowden, chief of the Federal Communications Commission's consumer and government affairs bureau, said those who signed up for the do-not-call list after the deadline likely would have to wait until early next year before calls are blocked.

The Federal Trade Commission is administering the list, while both the FCC and FTC are enforcing it. The list has proven extremely popular with consumers.

"Individuals want to have some control over the telephone calls coming to their homes every single day," Snowden said.

In addition, telemarketing calls by Jan. 1 must carry a name and phone number that will show up on Caller ID, Snowden said. Such calls often now only say "out of area."

The FTC has estimated that the list will block about 80 percent of telemarketing calls. Charities, pollsters and political campaigns are exempt.
In addition, a company may call a person if he or she has bought, leased or rented from the firm in the previous 18 months or has inquired about or applied for something during the past three months.

________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net

________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net

________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net

________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to 
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net

Reply via email to